draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-09.txt		draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt
	Internet Engineering Task Force E. Jankiewicz		Internet Engineering Task Force E. Jankiewicz
	Internet-Draft SRI International, Inc.		Internet-Draft SRI International, Inc.
	Obsoletes: 4294 (if approved) J. Loughney		Obsoletes: 4294 (if approved) J. Loughney
	Intended status: Informational Nokia		Intended status: Informational Nokia
	Expires: October 28, 2011 T. Narten		Expires: November 24, 2011 T. Narten
	IBM Corporation		IBM Corporation
	April 26, 2011		May 23, 2011
	IPv6 Node Requirements RFC 4294-bis		IPv6 Node Requirements
	draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-09.txt		draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-10.txt
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected		This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected
	that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.		that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
	Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function		Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
	well and interoperate in a large number of situations and		well and interoperate in a large number of situations and
	deployments.		deployments.
	This document obsoletes RFC4294.		This document obsoletes RFC4294.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 39		skipping to change at page 1, line 39
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on October 28, 2011.		This Internet-Draft will expire on November 24, 2011.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	skipping to change at page 3, line 18		skipping to change at page 3, line 18
	2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	2.1. Scope of This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.1. Scope of This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	2.2. Description of IPv6 Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		2.2. Description of IPv6 Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	3. Abbreviations Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		3. Abbreviations Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4. Sub-IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		4. Sub-IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5. IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5. IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460 . . . . . . . . . . 8		5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460 . . . . . . . . . . 8
	5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . . . 8		5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . . . 8
	5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes -		5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes -
	RFC 4191 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		RFC 4191 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971 . . . . . . . 9		5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971 . . . . . . . 10
	5.5. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175 . . . . 10		5.5. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175 . . . . 10
	5.6. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		5.6. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	5.6.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		5.6.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC		5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC
	4443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		4443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	5.9. Addressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		5.9. Addressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291 . . . 11		5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291 . . . 11
	5.9.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862 . 11		5.9.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862 . 11
	5.9.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in		5.9.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in
	IPv6 - RFC 4941 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		IPv6 - RFC 4941 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484 . . . . 12		5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484 . . . . 12
	5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . 12		5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 3315 . . . . 13
	5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 . . . . . . . 13		5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 . . . . . . . 13
	6. DHCP vs. Router Advertisement Options for Host		6. DHCP vs. Router Advertisement Options for Host
	Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	7. DNS and DHCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		7. DNS and DHCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	7.1. DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		7.1. DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	7.2. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)		7.2. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
	- RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		- RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	7.2.1. Other Configuration Information . . . . . . . . . . . 15		7.2.1. Other Configuration Information . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	7.2.2. Use of Router Advertisements in Managed		7.2.2. Use of Router Advertisements in Managed
	Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	7.3. IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS		7.3. IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS
	Configuration - RFC 6106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		Configuration - RFC 6106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	8. IPv4 Support and Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		8. IPv4 Support and Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	8.1. Transition Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		8.1. Transition Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	8.1.1. Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and		8.1.1. Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and
	Routers - RFC 4213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		Routers - RFC 4213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	9. Application Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		9. Application Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952 . . . 16		9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952 . . . 16
	9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs) . . . . . . . . . . 16		9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs) . . . . . . . . . . 16
	10. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		10. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17		11. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
	11.1. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		11.1. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	11.2. Transforms and Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		11.2. Transforms and Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	12. Router-Specific Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		12. Router-Specific Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	12.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		12.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	12.1.1. IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC 2711 . . . . . . . . . 19		12.1.1. IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC 2711 . . . . . . . . . 19
	12.1.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . 19		12.1.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . 19
	13. Network Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		13. Network Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
	13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs) . . . . . . . . 19		13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs) . . . . . . . . 20
	13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet		13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet
	Protocol (IP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		Protocol (IP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	16. Authors and Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		16. Authors and Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document) . . . . . . 20		16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document) . . . . . . 20
	16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279 . . . . . . . . 20		16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279 . . . . . . . . 20
	17. Appendix: Changes from -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21		17. Appendix: Changes from One ID version to Another . . . . . . . 21
	18. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21		17.1. Appendix: Changes from -09 to -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
	19. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22		17.2. Appendix: Changes from -08 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
	20. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22		17.3. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
	21. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22		17.4. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
	22. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23		17.5. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
	23. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23		17.6. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
	24. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24		17.7. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
	24.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24		18. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
	24.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27		19. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29		19.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
			19.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
			Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
	1. Requirements Language		1. Requirements Language
	The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
	2. Introduction		2. Introduction
	This document defines common functionality required from both IPv6		This document defines common functionality required from both IPv6
	skipping to change at page 8, line 9		skipping to change at page 8, line 9
	- Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address		- Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address
	Translations (NATs) [RFC4380]		Translations (NATs) [RFC4380]
	- Section 3 of "Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms" [RFC4213]		- Section 3 of "Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms" [RFC4213]
	5. IP Layer		5. IP Layer
	5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460		5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460
	The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC2460]. This		The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC2460]. This
	specification MUST be supported.		specification MUST be supported.
	Unrecognized options in Hop-by-Hop Options or Destination Options		Any unrecognized extension headers or options MUST be processed as
	extensions MUST be processed as described in RFC 2460.		described in RFC 2460.
	The node MUST follow the packet transmission rules in RFC 2460.		The node MUST follow the packet transmission rules in RFC 2460.
	Nodes MUST always be able to send, receive, and process fragment		Nodes MUST always be able to send, receive, and process fragment
	headers. All conformant IPv6 implementations MUST be capable of		headers. All conformant IPv6 implementations MUST be capable of
	sending and receiving IPv6 packets; the forwarding functionality MAY		sending and receiving IPv6 packets; the forwarding functionality MAY
	be supported. Overlapping fragments MUST be handled as described in		be supported. Overlapping fragments MUST be handled as described in
	[RFC5722].		[RFC5722].
	RFC 2460 specifies extension headers and the processing for these		RFC 2460 specifies extension headers and the processing for these
	headers.		headers.
	A full implementation of IPv6 includes implementation of the
	following extension headers: Hop-by-Hop Options, Routing (Type 0),
	Fragment, Destination Options, Authentication and Encapsulating
	Security Payload [RFC2460].
	An IPv6 node MUST be able to process these headers. An exception is		An IPv6 node MUST be able to process these headers. An exception is
	Routing Header type 0 (RH0) which was deprecated by [RFC5095] due to		Routing Header type 0 (RH0) which was deprecated by [RFC5095] due to
	security concerns, and which MUST be treated as an unrecognized		security concerns, and which MUST be treated as an unrecognized
	routing type.		routing type.
	5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861		5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861
	Neighbor Discovery is defined in [RFC4861] and was updated by		Neighbor Discovery is defined in [RFC4861] and was updated by
	[RFC5942]. Neighbor Discovery SHOULD be supported. RFC4861 states:		[RFC5942]. Neighbor Discovery SHOULD be supported. RFC4861 states:
	skipping to change at page 9, line 43		skipping to change at page 9, line 38
	edge networks.		edge networks.
	"IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] includes additional		"IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] includes additional
	recommendations on how to select from a set of available routers.		recommendations on how to select from a set of available routers.
	RFC 4311 SHOULD be supported.		RFC 4311 SHOULD be supported.
	5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes - RFC 4191		5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes - RFC 4191
	"Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes" [RFC4191]		"Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes" [RFC4191]
	provides support for nodes attached to multiple (different) networks		provides support for nodes attached to multiple (different) networks
	each advertising its own default route(s). Nodes (routers or hosts)		each providing routers that advertise themselves as default routers
	MAY wish to implement this functionality.		via Router Advertisements. In some scenarios, one router may provide
			connectivity to destinations the other router does not and choosing
			the "wrong" default router can result in reachability failures. In
			such cases, RFC4191 can help.
			Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) deployments supported by routers
			adhering to [RFC6204], use [RFC4191] to advertise routes to certain
			local destinations. Consequently, nodes that will be deployed in
			SOHO environments SHOULD implement [RFC4191].
	5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971		5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971
	SEND [RFC3971] and Cryptographically Generated Address (CGA)		SEND [RFC3971] and Cryptographically Generated Address (CGA)
	[RFC3972] provide a way to secure the message exchanges of Neighbor		[RFC3972] provide a way to secure the message exchanges of Neighbor
	Discovery. SEND is a new technology, in that it has no IPv4		Discovery. SEND is a new technology, in that it has no IPv4
	counterpart but it has significant potential to address certain		counterpart but it has significant potential to address certain
	classes of spoofing attacks. While there have been some		classes of spoofing attacks. While there have been some
	implementations of SEND, there has been only limited deployment		implementations of SEND, there has been only limited deployment
	experience to date in using the technology. In addition, the IETF		experience to date in using the technology. In addition, the IETF
	skipping to change at page 11, line 7		skipping to change at page 11, line 10
	fragmentation and reassembly.		fragmentation and reassembly.
	One operational issue with Path MTU discovery occurs when firewalls		One operational issue with Path MTU discovery occurs when firewalls
	block ICMP Packet Too Big messages. Path MTU discovery relies on		block ICMP Packet Too Big messages. Path MTU discovery relies on
	such messages to determine what size messages can be successfully		such messages to determine what size messages can be successfully
	sent. Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery [RFC4821] avoids having		sent. Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery [RFC4821] avoids having
	a dependency on Packet Too Big messages.		a dependency on Packet Too Big messages.
	5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675		5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675
	IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] MAY be supported.		IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] are an optional extension that allow the
			sending of IP datagrams larger than 65.535 bytes. IPv6 Jumbograms
			make use of IPv6 hop-by-hop options and are only suitable on paths in
			which every hop and link are capable of supporting Jumbograms (e.g.,
			within a campus or datacenter). To date, few implementations exist
			and there is essentially no reported experience from usage.
			Consequently, IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] remain optional at this time.
	5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC 4443		5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC 4443
	ICMPv6 [RFC4443] MUST be supported. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi-		ICMPv6 [RFC4443] MUST be supported. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi-
	Part Messages" [RFC4884] MAY be supported.		Part Messages" [RFC4884] MAY be supported.
	5.9. Addressing		5.9. Addressing
	5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291		5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291
	skipping to change at page 12, line 29		skipping to change at page 12, line 40
	point of attachment, the Interface Identifier portion of those		point of attachment, the Interface Identifier portion of those
	addresses remain the same, making it possible for servers to track		addresses remain the same, making it possible for servers to track
	the location of an individual device as it moves around, or its		the location of an individual device as it moves around, or its
	pattern of activity if it remains in one place. This may raise		pattern of activity if it remains in one place. This may raise
	privacy concerns as described in [RFC4862].		privacy concerns as described in [RFC4862].
	In such situations, RFC4941 SHOULD be implemented. In other cases,		In such situations, RFC4941 SHOULD be implemented. In other cases,
	such as with dedicated servers in a data center, RFC4941 provides		such as with dedicated servers in a data center, RFC4941 provides
	limited or no benefit.		limited or no benefit.
	Implementors of "RFC4941 should be aware that certain addresses are		Implementers of "RFC4941 should be aware that certain addresses are
	reserved and should not be chosen for use as temporary addresses.		reserved and should not be chosen for use as temporary addresses.
	Consult "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers" [RFC5453] for more		Consult "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers" [RFC5453] for more
	details.		details.
	5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484		5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484
	The rules specified in the Default Address Selection for IPv6		The rules specified in the Default Address Selection for IPv6
	[RFC3484] document MUST be implemented. IPv6 nodes will need to deal		[RFC3484] document MUST be implemented. IPv6 nodes will need to deal
	with multiple addresses configured simultaneously.		with multiple addresses configured simultaneously.
	5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration		5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 3315
	DHCP can be used to obtain and configure addresses. In general, a		DHCPv6 [RFC3315] can be used to obtain and configure addresses. In
	network may provide for the configuration of addresses through Router		general, a network may provide for the configuration of addresses
	Advertisements, DHCP or both. At the present time, the configuration		through Router Advertisements, DHCPv6 or both. There will be a wide
	of stateless address autoconfiguration is more widely implemented in		range of IPv6 deployment models and differences in address assignment
	hosts than address configuration through DHCP. However, some		requirements, some of which may require DHCPv6 for address
	environments may require the use of DHCP and may not support the		assignment. Consequently all hosts SHOULD implement address
	configuration of addresses via RAs. Implementations should be aware		configuration via DHCPv6.
	of what operating environment their devices will be deployed. Hosts
	MAY implement address configuration via DHCP.
	In the absence of a router, IPv6 nodes using DHCP for address		In the absence of a router, IPv6 nodes using DHCP for address
	assignment MAY initiate DHCP to obtain IPv6 addresses and other		assignment MAY initiate DHCP to obtain IPv6 addresses and other
	configuration information, as described in Section 5.5.2 of		configuration information, as described in Section 5.5.2 of
	[RFC4862].		[RFC4862].
	5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6		5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6
	Nodes that need to join multicast groups MUST support MLDv1		Nodes that need to join multicast groups MUST support MLDv1
	[RFC2710]. MLDv1 is needed by any node that is expected to receive		[RFC2710]. MLDv1 is needed by any node that is expected to receive
	skipping to change at page 14, line 31		skipping to change at page 14, line 38
	One issue with having multiple ways of configuring the same		One issue with having multiple ways of configuring the same
	information is that if a host chooses one mechanism, but the network		information is that if a host chooses one mechanism, but the network
	operator chooses a different mechanism, interoperability suffers.		operator chooses a different mechanism, interoperability suffers.
	For "closed" environments, where the network operator has significant		For "closed" environments, where the network operator has significant
	influence over what devices connect to the network and thus what		influence over what devices connect to the network and thus what
	configuration mechanisms they support, the operator may be able to		configuration mechanisms they support, the operator may be able to
	ensure that a particular mechanism is supported by all connected		ensure that a particular mechanism is supported by all connected
	hosts. In more open environments, however, where arbitrary devices		hosts. In more open environments, however, where arbitrary devices
	may connect (e.g., a WIFI hotspot), problems can arise. To maximize		may connect (e.g., a WIFI hotspot), problems can arise. To maximize
	interoperability in such environments hosts may need to implement		interoperability in such environments hosts would need to implement
	multiple configuration mechanisms to ensure interoperability.		multiple configuration mechanisms to ensure interoperability.
	Originally in IPv6, configuring information about DNS servers was		Originally in IPv6, configuring information about DNS servers was
	performed exclusively via DHCP. In 2007, an RA option was defined,		performed exclusively via DHCP. In 2007, an RA option was defined,
	but was published as Experimental [RFC5006]. In 2010, "IPv6 Router		but was published as Experimental [RFC5006]. In 2010, "IPv6 Router
	Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" [RFC6106] was published		Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" [RFC6106] was published
	as a Standards Track Document. Consequently, DNS configuration		as a Standards Track Document. Consequently, DNS configuration
	information can now be learned either through DHCP or through RAs.		information can now be learned either through DHCP or through RAs.
	Hosts will need to decide which mechanism (or whether both) should be		Hosts will need to decide which mechanism (or whether both) should be
	implemented.		implemented.
	skipping to change at page 16, line 29		skipping to change at page 16, line 38
	9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952		9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952
	Software that allows users and operators to input IPv6 addresses in		Software that allows users and operators to input IPv6 addresses in
	text form SHOULD support "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text		text form SHOULD support "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text
	Representation" [RFC5952].		Representation" [RFC5952].
	9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs)		9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs)
	There are a number of IPv6-related APIs. This document does not		There are a number of IPv6-related APIs. This document does not
	mandate the use of any, because the choice of API does not directly		mandate the use of any, because the choice of API does not directly
	relate to on-the-wire behavior of protocols. Implementors, however,		relate to on-the-wire behavior of protocols. Implementers, however,
	would be advised to consider providing a common API, or reviewing		would be advised to consider providing a common API, or reviewing
	existing APIs for the type of functionality they provide to		existing APIs for the type of functionality they provide to
	applications.		applications.
	"Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6" [RFC3493] provides IPv6		"Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6" [RFC3493] provides IPv6
	functionality used by typical applications. Implementors should note		functionality used by typical applications. Implementers should note
	that RFC3493 has been picked up and further standardized by POSIX		that RFC3493 has been picked up and further standardized by POSIX
	[POSIX].		[POSIX].
	"Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6"		"Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6"
	[RFC3542] provides access to advanced IPv6 features needed by		[RFC3542] provides access to advanced IPv6 features needed by
	diagnostic and other more specialized applications.		diagnostic and other more specialized applications.
	"IPv6 Socket API for Source Address Selection" [RFC5014] provides		"IPv6 Socket API for Source Address Selection" [RFC5014] provides
	facilities that allow an application to override the default Source		facilities that allow an application to override the default Source
	Address Selection rules of [RFC3484].		Address Selection rules of [RFC3484].
	skipping to change at page 20, line 27		skipping to change at page 20, line 38
	15. IANA Considerations		15. IANA Considerations
	This document has no requests for IANA.		This document has no requests for IANA.
	16. Authors and Acknowledgments		16. Authors and Acknowledgments
	16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document)		16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document)
	For this version of the IPv6 Node Requirements document, the authors		For this version of the IPv6 Node Requirements document, the authors
	would like to thank Hitoshi Asaeda, Brian Carpenter, Tim Chown,		would like to thank Hitoshi Asaeda, Brian Carpenter, Tim Chown, Ralph
	Sheila Frankel, Sam Hartman, Paul Hoffman, Pekka Savola, Yaron		Droms, Sheila Frankel, Sam Hartman, Bob Hinden, Paul Hoffman, Pekka
	Sheffer and Dave Thaler for their comments.		Savola, Yaron Sheffer and Dave Thaler for their comments.
	16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279		16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279
	The original version of this document (RFC 4279) was written by the		The original version of this document (RFC 4279) was written by the
	IPv6 Node Requirements design team:		IPv6 Node Requirements design team:
	Jari Arkko		Jari Arkko
	jari.arkko@ericsson.com		jari.arkko@ericsson.com
	Marc Blanchet		Marc Blanchet
	marc.blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca		marc.blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca
	skipping to change at page 21, line 27		skipping to change at page 21, line 38
	dthaler@windows.microsoft.com		dthaler@windows.microsoft.com
	Juha Wiljakka		Juha Wiljakka
	juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com		juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com
	The authors would like to thank Ran Atkinson, Jim Bound, Brian		The authors would like to thank Ran Atkinson, Jim Bound, Brian
	Carpenter, Ralph Droms, Christian Huitema, Adam Machalek, Thomas		Carpenter, Ralph Droms, Christian Huitema, Adam Machalek, Thomas
	Narten, Juha Ollila, and Pekka Savola for their comments. Thanks to		Narten, Juha Ollila, and Pekka Savola for their comments. Thanks to
	Mark Andrews for comments and corrections on DNS text. Thanks to		Mark Andrews for comments and corrections on DNS text. Thanks to
	Alfred Hoenes for tracking the updates to various RFCs.		Alfred Hoenes for tracking the updates to various RFCs.
	17. Appendix: Changes from -08 to -09		17. Appendix: Changes from One ID version to Another
			RFC Editor: Please remove this section upon publication.
			17.1. Appendix: Changes from -09 to -10
			1. With changes in requirements for IPsec and Routing Headers,
			clarified language regarding processing of unknown options, and
			removed paragraph lising which extension headers were required to
			be implemented.
			2. Removed "RFC4292-bis" from title.
			3. Expanded the text on Jumbograms.
			4. Changed recommendation of DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD.
			5. Expanded the text on RFC4191, and changed recommendation from MAY
			to SHOULD.
			17.2. Appendix: Changes from -08 to -09
	1. Updated MLD section to include reference to Lightweight MLD		1. Updated MLD section to include reference to Lightweight MLD
	[RFC5790]		[RFC5790]
	18. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08		17.3. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08
	1. Dropped reference to "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains		1. Dropped reference to "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains
	without Explicit Tunnels" [RFC2429] in favor of a reference to		without Explicit Tunnels" [RFC2429] in favor of a reference to
	tunneling via Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms (RFC4313).		tunneling via Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms (RFC4313).
	2. Added reference to "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific		2. Added reference to "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific
	Routes" [RFC4191] as a MAY.		Routes" [RFC4191] as a MAY.
	3. Added reference to "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)		3. Added reference to "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)
	for IPv6" (RFC4429).		for IPv6" (RFC4429).
	4. Added reference to RFC4941 "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"		4. Added reference to RFC4941 "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"
	5. Added Section on APIs. References are FYI, and none are		5. Added Section on APIs. References are FYI, and none are
	skipping to change at page 22, line 4		skipping to change at page 22, line 30
	Routes" [RFC4191] as a MAY.		Routes" [RFC4191] as a MAY.
	3. Added reference to "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)		3. Added reference to "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)
	for IPv6" (RFC4429).		for IPv6" (RFC4429).
	4. Added reference to RFC4941 "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"		4. Added reference to RFC4941 "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"
	5. Added Section on APIs. References are FYI, and none are		5. Added Section on APIs. References are FYI, and none are
	required.		required.
	6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]		6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
	SHOULD be implemented		SHOULD be implemented
	7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a		7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
	MUST to implement.		MUST to implement.
	8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"		8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
	[RFC5952] a SHOULD.		[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
	19. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07		17.4. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07
	1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5		1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5
	of RFC 3775.		of RFC 3775.
	2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC		2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC
	6106) has been published.		6106) has been published.
	3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation.		3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation.
	4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added		4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added
	as a MAY.		as a MAY.
	5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).		5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).
	6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]		6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
	SHOULD be implemented		SHOULD be implemented
	7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a		7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
	MUST to implement.		MUST to implement.
	8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"		8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
	[RFC5952] a SHOULD.		[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
	20. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06		17.5. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06
	1. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 section. Text has been discussed		1. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 section. Text has been discussed
	by 6man and saag.		by 6man and saag.
	2. Added text to introduction clarifying that this document applies		2. Added text to introduction clarifying that this document applies
	to general nodes and that other profiles may be more specific in		to general nodes and that other profiles may be more specific in
	their requirements		their requirements
	3. Editorial cleanups in Neighbor Discovery section in particular.		3. Editorial cleanups in Neighbor Discovery section in particular.
	Text made more crisp.		Text made more crisp.
	4. Moved some of the DHCP text around. Moved stateful address		4. Moved some of the DHCP text around. Moved stateful address
	discussion to Section 5.8.5.		discussion to Section 5.8.5.
	5. Added additional nuance to the redirect requirements w.r.t.		5. Added additional nuance to the redirect requirements w.r.t.
	default configuration setting.		default configuration setting.
	21. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05		17.6. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05
	1. Cleaned up IPsec section, but key questions (MUST vs. SHOULD)		1. Cleaned up IPsec section, but key questions (MUST vs. SHOULD)
	still open.		still open.
	2. Added background section on DHCP vs. RA options.		2. Added background section on DHCP vs. RA options.
	3. Added SHOULD recommendation for DNS configuration vi RAs		3. Added SHOULD recommendation for DNS configuration vi RAs
	(RFC5006bis).		(RFC5006bis).
	4. Cleaned up DHCP section, as it was referring to the M&O bits.		4. Cleaned up DHCP section, as it was referring to the M&O bits.
	5. Cleaned up the Security Considerations Section.		5. Cleaned up the Security Considerations Section.
	22. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04		17.7. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04
	1. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an applicability		1. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an applicability
	statement		statement
	2. Updated the section on Mobility protocols		2. Updated the section on Mobility protocols
	3. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and		3. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and
	added some more RFCs.		added some more RFCs.
	4. Added Section on SEND (make it a MAY)		4. Added Section on SEND (make it a MAY)
	5. Redid Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more nuance		5. Redid Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more nuance
	to recommendation		to recommendation
	6. Redid section on Mobility, and added additional RFCs.		6. Redid section on Mobility, and added additional RFCs.
	23. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294		18. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294
	1. There have been many editorial clarifications as well as		1. There have been many editorial clarifications as well as
	significant additions and updates. While this section		significant additions and updates. While this section
	highlights some of the changes, readers should not rely on this		highlights some of the changes, readers should not rely on this
	section for a comprehensive list of all changes.		section for a comprehensive list of all changes.
	2. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an		2. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an
	applicability statement and that this document is aimed at		applicability statement and that this document is aimed at
	general nodes.		general nodes.
	3. Significantly updated the section on Mobility protocols, adding		3. Significantly updated the section on Mobility protocols, adding
	references and downgrading previous SHOULDs to MAY.		references and downgrading previous SHOULDs to MAY.
	4. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and		4. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and
	added some more RFCs.		added some more RFCs.
	5. Added Section on SEND (it is a MAY)		5. Added Section on SEND (it is a MAY)
	6. Revised Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more		6. Revised Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more
	nuance to recommendation.		nuance to recommendation.
	7. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 Section, downgrading overall		7. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 Section, downgrading overall
	recommendation to a SHOULD.		recommendation to a SHOULD.
	8. Added background section on DHCP vs RA options, added SHOULD		8. Upgraded recommendation of DHCPv6 to SHOULD.
			9. Added background section on DHCP vs RA options, added SHOULD
	recommendation sfor DNS configuration via RAs (RFC 6106),		recommendation sfor DNS configuration via RAs (RFC 6106),
	cleaned up DHCP recommendations		cleaned up DHCP recommendations
	9. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5		10. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5
	of RFC 3775.		of RFC 3775.
	10. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).		11. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).
	11. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]		12. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
	SHOULD be implemented		SHOULD be implemented
	12. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a		13. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
	MUST to implement.		MUST to implement.
	13. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"		14. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
	[RFC5952] a SHOULD.		[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
	14. Removed mention of "DNAME" from the discussion about RFC-3363.		15. Removed mention of "DNAME" from the discussion about RFC-3363.
	15. Numerous updates to reflect newer versions of IPv6 documents,		16. Numerous updates to reflect newer versions of IPv6 documents,
	including 4443, 4291, 3596, 4213.		including 4443, 4291, 3596, 4213.
			17. Removed discussion of "Managed" and "Other" flags in RAs. There
	16. Removed discussion of "Managed" and "Other" flags in RAs. There
	is no consensus at present on how to process these flags and		is no consensus at present on how to process these flags and
	discussion of their semantics was removed in the most recent		discussion of their semantics was removed in the most recent
	update of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (RFC 4862).		update of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (RFC 4862).
	17. Added many more references to optional IPv6 documents.		18. Added many more references to optional IPv6 documents.
	18. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"		19. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
	[RFC5952] a SHOULD.		[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
	19. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a		20. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
	MUST to implement.		MUST to implement.
	20. Updated MLD section to include reference to Lightweight MLD		21. Updated MLD section to include reference to Lightweight MLD
	[RFC5790]		[RFC5790]
			22. Added SHOULD recommendation for "Default Router Preferences and
			More-Specific Routes" [RFC4191].
	24. References		19. References
	24.1. Normative References		19.1. Normative References
	[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",		[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
	STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.		STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
	[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and		[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
	specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.		specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
	[RFC1981] McCann, J., Deering, S., and J. Mogul, "Path MTU Discovery		[RFC1981] McCann, J., Deering, S., and J. Mogul, "Path MTU Discovery
	for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.		for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.
	skipping to change at page 27, line 16		skipping to change at page 27, line 44
	Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010.		Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010.
	[RFC5996] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,		[RFC5996] Kaufman, C., Hoffman, P., Nir, Y., and P. Eronen,
	"Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",		"Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2)",
	RFC 5996, September 2010.		RFC 5996, September 2010.
	[RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,		[RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
	"IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",		"IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",
	RFC 6106, November 2010.		RFC 6106, November 2010.
	24.2. Informative References		[RFC6204] Singh, H., Beebee, W., Donley, C., Stark, B., and O.
			Troan, "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge
			Routers", RFC 6204, April 2011.
			19.2. Informative References
	[DODv6] DISR IPv6 Standards Technical Working Group, "DoD IPv6		[DODv6] DISR IPv6 Standards Technical Working Group, "DoD IPv6
	Standard Profiles For IPv6 Capable Products Version 5.0",		Standard Profiles For IPv6 Capable Products Version 5.0",
	July 2010,		July 2010,
	<http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/apl/ipv6/pdf/disr_ipv6_50.pdf>.		<http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/apl/ipv6/pdf/disr_ipv6_50.pdf>.
	[POSIX] IEEE, "IEEE Std. 1003.1-2001 Standard for Information		[POSIX] IEEE, "IEEE Std. 1003.1-2001 Standard for Information
	Technology -- Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX),		Technology -- Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX),
	ISO/IEC 9945:2002", December 2001,		ISO/IEC 9945:2002", December 2001,
	<http://www.opengroup.org/austin>.		<http://www.opengroup.org/austin>.
End of changes. 44 change blocks.
	75 lines changed or deleted		107 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/